Performance comparison of evacuated U-tube solar collector integrated parabolic reflector with conventional evacuated U-tube solar collector

被引:0
|
作者
B KIRAN NAIK
S PREMNATH
P MUTHUKUMAR
机构
[1] IIT Guwahati,Mechanical Engineering Department
[2] Bannari Amman Institute of Technology,Sustainable Thermal Energy Systems Laboratory (STESL), Mechanical Engineering Department
[3] NIT Rourkela,undefined
来源
Sādhanā | 2021年 / 46卷
关键词
Parabolic reflector; energy intake; thermal efficeicncy; thermal model; experimental analysis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In the present study, performance of the fabricated evacuated U-tube solar collector integrated parabolic reflector (EUSCIPR) and conventional evacuated U-tube solar collector (CEUSC) are analysed experimentally. With reference to humid climatic conditions, a 3D model is developed for comparing the thermal performance of EUSCIPR with a CEUSC. Developed model is validated with field test data and found in good agreement among them. Heat transfer fluid (HTF) temperature difference, energy intake/heat gain and thermal efficiency of the solar collectors are investigated experimentally at various ambient temperatures and solar intensities. From the experimental investigations, it was observed that, in a sunny day, the energy losses incurred across the solar collectors was high during peak hour (1: 20 PM). From the numerical studies, it is found that within the given operating range, the thermal efficiency of the EUSCIPR is 14.1% higher than CEUSC. Further, for a given inlet condition, the contour plots for variation of HTF temperature along the U-tube of EUSCIPR and CEUSC are predicted numerically, and the obtained results are discussed in detail.
引用
下载
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Performance of evacuated tube solar collector integrated solar desalination unit - a review
    Kumar, Rajeev
    Singh, Desh Bandhu
    Dewangan, Ashish
    Singh, Vivek Kumar
    Kumar, Navneet
    DESALINATION AND WATER TREATMENT, 2021, 230 : 92 - 115
  • [32] Modeling and Performance Optimization of the U-pipe Glass Evacuated Tube Solar Collector
    Chen, Xiaomeng
    Guo, Fang
    Wang, Chunlin
    Yang, Xudong
    PROCEEDINGS OF BUILDING SIMULATION 2019: 16TH CONFERENCE OF IBPSA, 2020, : 4436 - 4442
  • [33] Thermal performance and parameter analysis of a U-pipe evacuated solar tube collector
    Gao, Y.
    Fan, R.
    Zhang, X. Y.
    An, Y. J.
    Wang, M. X.
    Gao, Y. K.
    Yu, Y.
    SOLAR ENERGY, 2014, 107 : 714 - 727
  • [34] Effects of thermal performance of enclosed-type evacuated U-tube solar collector with multi-walled carbon nanotube/water nanofluid
    Tong, Yijie
    Kim, Jinhyun
    Cho, Honghyun
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2015, 83 : 463 - 473
  • [35] Assessments of thermal performance of hybrid and mono nanofluid U-tube solar collector system
    Yildirim, Erdal
    Yurddas, Ali
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2021, 171 : 1079 - 1096
  • [36] Performance of a solar still integrated with evacuated tube collector in natural mode
    Singh, Ragh Vendra
    Kumar, Shiv
    Hasan, M. M.
    Khan, M. Emran
    Tiwari, G. N.
    DESALINATION, 2013, 318 : 25 - 33
  • [37] Thermal Performance of the U-Tube Solar Collector Using Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulation
    Farjallah, Rim
    Chaabane, Monia
    Mhiri, Hatem
    Bournot, Philippe
    Dhaouadi, Hatem
    JOURNAL OF SOLAR ENERGY ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2016, 138 (06):
  • [38] Effect of nanoparticle shape of Al2O3/Pure Water nanofluid on evacuated U-Tube solar collector efficiency
    Kaya, Hueseyin
    Alkasem, Mohanad
    Arslan, Kamil
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2020, 162 : 267 - 284
  • [39] An Experimental Comparison of the Performance of Various Evacuated Tube Solar Collector Designs
    Said, Sana
    Mellouli, Sofiene
    Alqahtani, Talal
    Algarni, Salem
    Ajjel, Ridha
    Ghachem, Kaouther
    Kolsi, Lioua
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (06)
  • [40] Theoretical and experimental investigation of the filled-type evacuated tube solar collector with U tube
    Liang, Ruobing
    Ma, Liangdong
    Zhang, Jili
    Zhao, Dan
    SOLAR ENERGY, 2011, 85 (09) : 1735 - 1744